Co-designing Behavior Change Resources With Treatment-Seeking Smokers: Engagement Events' Findings

Healthcare providers' perspectives on implementing a brief physical activity and diet intervention within a primary care smoking cessation program: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Post-smoking-cessation weight gain can be a major barrier to quitting smoking; however, adding behavior change interventions for physical activity (PA) and diet may adversely affect smoking cessation outcomes. The "Picking up the PACE (Promoting and Accelerating Change through Empowerment)" study assessed change in PA, fruit/vegetable consumption, and smoking cessation by providing a clinical decision support system for healthcare providers to utilize at the intake appointment, and found no significant change in PA, fruits/vegetable consumption, or smoking cessation. The objective of this qualitative study was to explore the factors affecting the implementation of the intervention and contextualize the quantitative results.

METHODS

Twenty-five semi-structured interviews were conducted with healthcare providers, using questions based on the National Implementation Research Network's Hexagon Tool. The data were analyzed using the framework's standard analysis approach.

RESULTS

Most healthcare providers reported a need to address PA and fruit/vegetable consumption in patients trying to quit smoking, and several acknowledged that the intervention was a good fit since exercise and diet could improve smoking cessation outcomes. However, many healthcare providers mentioned the need to explain the fit to the patients. Social determinants of health (e.g., low income, food insecurity) were brought up as barriers to the implementation of the intervention by a majority of healthcare providers. Most healthcare providers recognized training as a facilitator to the implementation, but time was mentioned as a barrier by many of healthcare providers. Majority of healthcare providers mentioned allied health professionals (e.g., dieticians, physiotherapists) supported the implementation of the PACE intervention. However, most healthcare providers reported a need for individualized approach and adaptation of the intervention based on the patients' needs when implementing the intervention. The COVID-19 pandemic was found to impact the implementation of the PACE intervention based on the Hexagon Tool indicators.

CONCLUSION

There appears to be a need to utilize a flexible approach when addressing PA and fruit/vegetable consumption within a smoking cessation program, based on the context of clinic, the patients' it is serving, and their life circumstances. Healthcare providers need support and external resources to implement this particular intervention.

NAME OF THE REGISTRY

Clinicaltrials.gov.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04223336.

DATE OF REGISTRATION

7 January 2020 Retrospectively registered. URL OF TRIAL REGISTRY RECORD: https://classic.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov/ct2/show/NCT04223336 .

Impact of a Clinical Decision Support System for Addressing Physical Activity and/or Healthy Eating during Smoking Cessation Treatment: Hybrid Type I Randomized Controlled Trial (Preprint)

Background

People who smoke have other risk factors for chronic diseases, such as low levels of physical activity and poor diet. Clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) might help health care practitioners integrate interventions for diet and physical activity into their smoking cessation programming but could worsen quit rates.

Objective

The aims of this study are to assess the effects of the addition of a CDSS for physical activity and diet on smoking cessation outcomes and to assess the implementation of the study.

Methods

We conducted a pragmatic hybrid type I effectiveness-implementation trial with 232 team-based primary care practices in Ontario, Canada, from November 2019 to May 2021. We used a 2-arm randomized controlled trial comparing a CDSS addressing physical activity and diet to treatment as usual and used the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance framework to measure implementation outcomes. The primary outcome was self-reported 7-day tobacco abstinence at 6 months.

Results

We enrolled 5331 participants in the study. Of these, 2732 (51.2%) were randomized to the intervention group and 2599 (48.8%) to the control group. At the 6-month follow-up, 29.7% (634/2137) of respondents in the intervention arm and 27.3% (552/2020) in the control arm reported abstinence from tobacco. After multiple imputation, the absolute group difference was 2.1% (95% CI −0.5 to 4.6; F_1,1000.42=2.43; P=.12). Mean exercise minutes changed from 32 (SD 44.7) to 110 (SD 196.1) in the intervention arm and from 32 (SD 45.1) to 113 (SD 195.1) in the control arm (group effect: B=−3.7 minutes; 95% CI −17.8 to 10.4; P=.61). Servings of fruit and vegetables changed from 2.64 servings to 2.42 servings in the intervention group and from 2.52 servings to 2.45 servings in the control group (incidence rate ratio for intervention group=0.98; 95% CI 0.93-1.02; P=.35).

Conclusions

A CDSS for physical activity and diet may be added to a smoking cessation program without affecting the outcomes. Further research is needed to improve the impact of integrated health promotion interventions in primary care smoking cessation programs.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04223336 https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04223336

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

RR2-10.2196/19157